Woman who claimed to by struck by a police baton round during 12th parade has claim dismissed

A woman who alleged she was hit by a police baton round during Twelfth of July rioting in Belfast has lost a High Court battle for compensation.

Claire McCleave, 41, sued the Chief Constable over injuries sustained amid serious disorder at an Orange Order parade in the north of the city back in 2013.

But a judge rejected a claim for damages worth £20,000 after finding, on the balance of probabilities, that she was not struck by any projectile fired by PSNI officers.

Mr Justice Simpson also ruled that police used reasonable force at the scene on the Woodvale Road.

He said: “I am satisfied that police officers were in regular and imminent danger of serious injury, or worse, from objects thrown by or brandished by rioters in the course of a sustained and lengthy attack.”

Trouble flared after the July 12 march was prohibited from passing the neighbouring Ardoyne shop fronts.

With crowds of up to 5,000 people at the scene, police came under attack from stones, bottles, cans and pieces of masonry.

Video footage played in court showed some rioters climbing onto and damaging PSNI vehicles.

One man wielded a sword and thrust it at an officer carrying a riot shield amid efforts to breach the police lines.

In attempts to disperse the crowd water cannons were deployed and a number of baton rounds discharged.

Ms McCleave could be seen at one point in the footage, but there is no suggestion that she participated in the disorder.

Dressed in a ‘Union Jack’ bowler hat and carrying a flag, she had gone to the Woodvale Road with her uncle to meet other family members.

In evidence Ms McCleave stated that she was struck on the chest by something, looked down and picked up an object which her uncle informed her was a plastic baton round.

A short time later she gave an interview to a television news crew and left the scene.

Ms McCleave told the court she was in shock, experiencing chest tightness, pins and needles in her arm and was unable to sleep that night.

The following day she attended hospital but left without a medical examination.

For a six month period after the incident she did not want to leave the house, according to her account, and suffered nightmares for another year.

In a complaint to the Police Ombudsman, Ms McCleave stated that the rioting had occurred about a quarter of a mile from where she stood and “was not that bad”.

During cross-examination, however, she accepted the distance in her statement was incorrect, and being shocked at the scale of the disorder played in the footage, acknowledging it to be worse than she had thought.

Her action alleged negligence, assault, battery, trespass to the person and breach of statutory duty by the police.

Lawyers for the Chief Constable defended the claim on the grounds that the use of baton rounds was justified.

Water cannon had failed to disperse the crowd or halt the rioting, police lines were under sustained attack, and officers feared serious physical injury, the court heard.

In his ruling, Mr Justice Simpson set the level of potential damages in the case at £20,000.

But he dismissed the claim after referring to the medical evidence and Ms McCleave’s interview with a BBC reporter.

“I am not satisfied, having seen her demeanour, that she was shaking or appeared particularly shocked in what was the immediate aftermath of the alleged incident,” the judge said.

“Not only has the plaintiff failed to persuade me, on the balance of probabilities, that she was struck but, on the contrary, the evidence in the case satisfies me on the balance of probabilities that no projectile discharged… did strike the plaintiff.

“In the circumstances I consider that it is more likely than not that the plaintiff picked up a spent round, but that it did not strike her first.”

Based on the intensity of the rioting, Mr Justice Simpson held that it had been appropriate, reasonable and proportionate for officers fearing serious injury or worse to discharge the baton rounds at identified targets.

“I am satisfied that the force used… was such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime,” he confirmed.

“I dismiss the plaintiff’s claim for damages and enter judgment for the defendant.”

Want a quick and expert briefing on the biggest news stories? Listen to our latest podcasts to find out What You Need To Know.